I tried to use co-pilot to convert some multiple choice questions into a machine readable format for uploading to Moodle. Seemed to work great at first, but then started randomly skipping questions and swapping answers around. I can't fathom any serious use case it could be trusted for.

This little link was an absolute game changer for my Hull-CarletonU commute. Shaved off some considerable time, and made the commute a lot safer / more comfortable. Great to see the holes in the Ottawa-Gatineau bike network filled in!

To me the bizarre thing is that experimental studies in social science are often *less* reliable than observational ones because of how hard it is to make a good experimental scenario. Voting in a simulation just ain't the same, and countries will not let me randomly assign candidates in real ones

Maybe I misunderstood your point, but there is a travel advisory for China and not for the USA? While they've added some language about increased scrutiny at the US border, the advisory for China is very clear about arbitrary law enforcement. If anything we're still understating the US situation.

Yeah the sudden request for rescheduling seems very amateurish. If they were going to object on that basis they should have done it well before now.

I have no memory of it, but apparently we've done almost this exact thing before. Sometimes our politics can stray into self-parody territory.

www.cbc.ca/news/politic...

Thought about this a bit more, and now I think I actually might have read that he did this for people he appointed to the Senate, either in addition to or in place of cabinet. Just in case that helps you in searching.

I can offer up that I've definitely also read this before, but can't figure out where. It feels like an anecdote that would have been in Governing From the Centre but a quick ctrl +f tells me it's not.

#votewell.ca handles this a lot better imho, and just tells voters that they don't have any reason to vote strategically in this riding.

I also find some of their stances for the parties questionable. In a question about funding for universities, they rely on Singh saying tuition should be free. In questioning if our hate speech laws go too far, they rely on parties stances on a *proposed* law. Neither exactly matches the actual Q

I think there's probably something to this idea, particularly the idea that vesting one person with too many roles and powers makes it easier for them to slide towards being an autocrat. Still, Pakistan has a parliamentary system and Russia was only semi presidential; it's far from robust protection